Using Brand Name in Page titles
-
Is it a good practice to append our brand name at the end of every page title? We have a very strong brand name but it is also long. Right now what we are doing is saying:
Product Name | Long brand name here
Product Category | Long brand name here
Is this the right way to do it or should we just be going with ONLY the product and category names in our page titles? Right now we often exceed the 70 character recommendation limit.
-
In my Opinion your Brand Name should not be in your Titles. At least not on all pages. It should be in Contact pages, in pages and articles texts but it titles not that much. The reason I'm saying this is that there is 2 possible options :
1- Your Brand is not so well known so why trying to rank for your Brand when you could target a more efficient Target in term of relevant traffic generation.
2-Your Brand is well known, so that it is probably already in your Domain name and the texts everywhere everywhere on your sites, in anchor text of incoming links. You probably had a website running for this brand for a while so that Search Engine knows that your web property is the one of your brand. You probably also have a lot of links pointing to your homepage with your Brand for Anchor Text. Search Engine will then know.
So instead of focusing on your Brand, I think it's more clever to focused on bringing visitors and customer by using Keyword related to your products and services and have a larger base of customers to get awareness of the brand and then promote and recommend your Brand !
-
I thought about this after lunch and while I still stand behind my original post I think you can get away with leaving off your brand name if your products have a brand of their own.
Search for "Chuck Taylor All Stars". That's a brand in and of itself so Converse didn't add their name to that title tag.
Whereas if we're talking about a general product I'd say absolutely add the brand name like with "Pencil Sharpeners | Office Max".
-
In the case of Gap, not only is their brand name short, but it is also the brand of their clothes. People are going to be looking for Gap Jeans and the like. If you're in a similar situation where it's your brand name + product that signifies a sale, it'd probably be wise to have the brand in the title tag in that case, but you'll want to consider whether or not it's worth it across your site globally.
In a case like Harbor Freight, their name is some what long, but they use it on their location specific pages because they have stores, they get localized searches, and they are going to pull in visitors, and the usage adds value. On product specific searches it makes fewer appearances.
-
That could be. Then again, how do some brands become so well known for their brand identity? By including it everywhere human eyeballs are.
-
That's why I initially offered that the brand can be optional - if it's a weak brand, make use of that space in the Title - however rather than assuming a site can be found for Product Name | KickA$$ Price (very unlikely to be a high volume longer phrase), I believe it's better early on to get a couple phrases in each title where each phrase by itself is relevant, and the combination of those phrases (in different various sequences) is much more likely to get that many more people ultimately finding the site.
This is especially true when having quality content on the page - combine all those Title variations and partial variations with a handful of words in the content that results in exponential long tail visits.
Just my experience though.
-
I think that a lot of people using THEIR BRAND in the title tag are simply lazy or egotists.
... but it's OK with me.
-
Gap is lucky to have such a short brand name.
In a lot of cases we are talking about egos that are enormous compared to the size of a brand as widely known as Macy's.
For my sites at least I think that the opportunity to grab extra sale through the title tag is more important than trying to communicate a weak brand when I am head-to-head with a Macy's. I'd rather use my title tag to shout value propositions, elicit clicks and reach for more keywords.
When we are talking my brand vs Macy's I need to get my foot in the door with value and then impress them with service and quality.
-
I like the Hybrid approach. Much more dynamic.
-
Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Bergdorf Goodman, Fortunoff, Gap... All have their Brand in page Titles.
Interestingly, Gap uses the combination of Category | Gap | Sales Hook (a hybrid of my suggestion and EGOL's) on many of their pages.
-
To your comment Alan, I am talking about a world-renowned brand. With that in mind, it sounds like we should keep the brand there at the end in order to maximize clickthrough and brand recognition.
-
In most cases I'm a fan of leaving the brand name off of the title tag as EOGL mentions. It's probably in your URL and all over the page that someone is going to see if they click on your search result, so you should do as much as possible to get that click. His examples are great.
Also consider that people searching for your brand already know about your site and if they don't they still have a VERY high likelihood of interacting with your site at some point. With generic searches you want to do as much as possible to expose your brand to people that are unfamiliar with your brand, the ones that are the farthest from knowing who you are and what you do. If you track how someone arrives at your site via search, you're very likely to see this progression:
1. Generic search
2. Generic search + brand or domain name
3. Brand name search
4. PurchaseYour brand is important, but having it in your title tag has very little influence over steps 2-4. Focus on getting those initial visits.
-
I always recommend to clients that unless they're a world renowned brand, it's important to include the brand name on core information type pages (about, contact, jobs, etc.) as the first part of the page Title, but that it's optional to include on the rest of the site - and if it is included on other pages, it should definitely be at the end of the Title string, after each page's primary topical focus.
As for products and categories, unless you've got a site that's dominating the search results, I always recommend Product Name | Product Category | Optional BrandName
This is vital because you need to build topical relevance for every product - both specific to that product and how that page relates to it's larger category. Imagine having 30 product pages in one category - that's 31 pages that would have the Category emphasized, yet in proper syntactical order for individual page relevance.
Then, as your site becomes truly strong in search results, you can go with EGOL's method.
Always remember that Google only displays the first 70 characters at most from each Title - so look at how Titles would in Google. If you do include the brand at the tail, it's okay if it gets cut off in the Google display - they'll still see it, and users will see it in their browser when on your site - as an additional brand-strengthening aspect of your site's design.
-
Lots of people are hung-up on using their brand name in titles. I think that they should consider some of the examples below.... and use their imagination to appeal to the searcher. Let's be honest... brand names make a really sleepy title tag...
Product Name | KickA$$ Price
Product Name | Free Shipping
Product Name | A Phrase that Elicits Clicks
Product Name | Most Popular Uses
Product Name | Immediate Shipping
Product Name | What the Competition is Keeping Secret
Product Name | Buy Now and Get Free Beer
-
I think if you use Product Name | product Category you shouldn't use your brand name as second keyword but your product category.
On pages that you're not putting as much focus on the title ex: About us | Long Brand Name Here
Remember each page is treated as a unique page.
-
I'd say stick with what you have. Even if it exceeds 70 characters, like you say it's a recommendation to stay within it, not an absolute.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Rel canonical on other page instead of duplicate page. How Google responds?
Hi all, We have 3 pages for same topics. We decided to use rel canonical and remove old pages from search to avoid duplicate content. Out of these 3 pages....1 and 2 type of pages have more similar content where 3 type don't have. Generally we must use rel canonical between 1 and 2. But I am wondering what happens if I canonical between 1 and 3 while 2 has more similar content? Will Google respects it or penalise as we left the most similar page and used other page for canonical. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
How is this possible? #2 ranking with NO on-page keywords, no backlinks, no sitemap...
Hi everybody. I have a question ... I'm totally stumped. This question is being asked today (November 16th, 2015) just after Google updated something in their algorithm. Nobody seems to know what they did. and it has something to do with the new "Rank Brain" system they're now using. My niche is Logo Design Software (https://www.thelogocreator.com). I had the keywords "logo creator" on the page roughly 7 times. After Google updated, I lost about 10 spots and as of this writing, I've dropped to #15. So, maybe I over optimized. fine. Noticing that for the keyword "logo creator" ... NONE of the top 14 spots actually have "logo creator" in their page title and NONE of them have more that 2 instances (if any) of the keyword "logo creator" on the actual page. So I removed ALL instances of my keyword "logo creator" from my home page - used the Webmaster's Fetch Tool and moved up a few spots instantly. So what the heck? And the #2 spot for that keyword is www.logomakr.com - they have NO words at all on their pages, no blog, no sitemap and far fewer links than anybody in the top 10. Can anybody reading this shed some light? Marc Marc Sylvester
Algorithm Updates | | Laughingbird
Laughingbird Software0 -
Specific Page Penalty?
Having trouble to figure out why one of our pages is not ranking in SERPs, on-page optimisation looks decent to me. Checked by using gInfinity extension and searched for the page URL. Can one page be penalised from Google engines (.ie / .com ) and the rest of the website not penalised? The (possible) penalised page is showing in Google places in SERPs. I assume this would not show if it was penalised. Would appreciate any advice. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | notnem0 -
When did Google include display results per page into their ranking algorithm?
It looks like the change took place approx. 1-2 weeks ago. Example: A search for "business credit cards" with search settings at "never show instant results" and "50 results per page", the SERP has a total of 5 different domains in the top 10 (4 domains have multiple results). With the slider set at "10 results per page", there are 9 different domains with only 1 having multiple results. I haven't seen any mention of this change, did I just miss it? Are they becoming that blatant about forcing as many page views as possible for the sake of serving more ads?
Algorithm Updates | | BrianCC0 -
How could Penguin kill my top ten rank and promote this garbage page to a #5 spot
Hey, Before penguin, I had a #9 rank for the term "yoga poses". So as many of us are doing, I started looking at my link profile... and yes, there were around 300 links from an old yoga news website (anchor: yoga poses)... that lead to the page on my site optimized for this term. The problem is they took the site down, but not properly... I.E. they generate a "not available" message for browsers, but underneath, I guess the bots can still index all the pages... so I guess they were interpreting these links as coming from a cloaked site. So, I was able to get them to remove the links... webmaster tools reports half of them gone now. What I don't get though... is how Google can give this garbage page a #5 spot for a competitive term like "yoga poses"... Check out http://www.ebmyoga.com/beginyoga.html and compare it to my page... http://www.yogaclassplan.com/yoga-poses/ This page leads to highly quality 100% unique yoga pose articles... in my mind we deliver so much more value than the site with a #5 rank. I don't understand. Any insight? Thanks,
Algorithm Updates | | biomat0 -
Does google index non-public pages ie. members logged in page
hi, I was trying to locate resources on the topics regarding how much the google bot indexes in order to qualify a 'good' site on their engine. For example, our site has many pages that are associated with logged in users and not available to the public until they acquire a login username and password. Although those pages show up in google analytics, they should not be made public in the google index which is what happens. In light of Google trying to qualify a site according to how 'engaged' a user is on the site, I would feel that the activities on those member pages are very important. Can anyone offer suggestions on how Google treats those pages since we are planning to do further SEO optimization of those pages. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | jumpdates0 -
Google showing different pages for same search term in uk and usa
Hi Guys, I have an interesting question and think Google is being a bit strange.. Can anyone tell me why when I input the term design agency in Google.co.uk it shows one page, but when i tyupe in the same search term in Google.com (worldwide search) it shows another page.. Any ideas guys? Is this not bit strange?? Any help here be much appreciated.. Thanks Gareth
Algorithm Updates | | GAZ090 -
Google removing pages from Index for Panda effected sites?
We have several clients that we took over from other SEO firms in the last 6 months. We are seeing an odd trend. Links are disappearing from the reports. Not just the SEOmoz reports, but all the back link reports we use. Also... sites that pre Panda would show up as a citation or link, have not been showing up. Many are these are not Indexed, and are on large common Y.P or other type sites. Any one think Google is removing pages from the Index on sites based on Panda. Yours in all curiosity. PS ( we are not large enough to produce quantity data on this.)
Algorithm Updates | | MBayes0